Fwd: OBAMA'S PHANTOM SPACE PROGRAM

-----Original Message-----
From: rrdd3939@aol.com
To: rrdd3939@aol.com
Sent: Mon, Jun 14, 2010 9:35 am
Subject: OBAMA'S PHANTOM SPACE PROGRAM

                          OBAMA'S PHANTOM SPACE PROGRAM

  by Richard DePersio, groups.google.com/group/rickcosmos-eclectic

       Far more then a white lie. Obama promises a heavy-lifter by 2015 which will

lead to manned missions to asteroids, Mars and the moons of Mars beginning

in 2025. No stated purpose for heavy-lifter between those two years. It is

impossible to built a heavy-lifter in five years, especially, when he is laying-off                            virtually all Shuttle and Constellation scientists, engineers and technicians for they         

are the ones with the expertise in heavy-lifting and manned spaceflight. Constellation's

Ares heavy-lifter will be operational in 2017 - give or take a year and if we prevent

Constellation from being cancelled.

       1.25 trillion went down a presidential black hole in two failed stimulus packages

and Freddie and Fannie are sink holes. We've invested $9 billion in Constellation.

Will that go down self-same presidential black hole!?! It is the reason that we could

have a heavy-lifter by 2017 not 2015 by starting from scratch! Presidents Kennedy,

Johnson, Nixon, Reagan and Bush - chronologically and literally - in that order were

strongly committed to NASA and Bush to large-scale commercial investment in

space programs of their own. Obama wants to shift NASA's focus from space to

green pseudo-science.

       Recently, private sector SpaceX reached an altitude of 135 miles after three failed

attempts with a 'dummy' capsule. It claims that it will be ready to bring cargo to ISS

in early 2012 and astronauts in early 2014. It doesn't even posses blueprints for a

spacecraft and this is 2010! It recently informed fed gov that it requires an additional

$1 billion cost over-run) (c to reach an the altitude of 185 miles - location of ISS - and           lift 55,000 pounds like Space Shuttle. NASA wasn't cost-effective prior to 1992 but

shuttles were upgraded between 1992-97 and became over 90% cost-effective and

each of the three shuttles are certified for over 75 more flights. SpaceX also

indicated that it might have to limit it to 25,000 pounds - we will have to pay them to

do in two flights what the shuttle can do in one.

       Unlike the president, we're Capitalists and realists. SpaceX should be granted

more time to do it right - effectively, efficiently and SAFELY!   Extend the lifespan

of the shuttle for two to two and a half years - no more in order to be on the safe side.

ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: NASA/Boeing have blueprints for a mini-Orion (not

the one without blueprints which Obama proposed) but it was cancelled during R & D

phase (NASA s criticized for not completing ISS on schedule, it would have if it has         mini-Orion), resurrect it and it should be operational in 2 to 2 and a half years and be

able to lift over 35,000 pounds to ISS. PREVIOUS ORIGINAL PROPOSAL: Civilian

version of unmanned X-37B should be operational in less then two years (let's call

it "CONSTITUTION" when it becomes operational n order to drive liberals crazy!) and

manned version in 3 years or less (if estimates on the Air Force 'secret' program are

in the ball park).

        What about SpaceX's Falcon 9? Give it 3 to 4 years to begin cargo flights on a

limited basis and  5 to 6 years for limited number of manned flights. It should assume

nearly full control and responsibility (with NASA's watchful eye - eye opened             

wider on manned missions) by 2017 and virtual autonomy by 2021. Further, it should

immediately begin working with NASA and Boeing, as well as, NASA and Air Force

(recent directive allows for greater cooperation between NASA and military). Mini-Orion

should become Boeing/SpaceX project and unmanned and manned Constitutions

SpaceX programs (We spoke about NASA and Air Force using a different version in

original proposal concerning GPS previously).

        The astronautic-ally-challenged think that Constellation represents a step backward

by using Apollo/Saturn and Shuttle technologies and not cutting-edge technology.

Point One: it isn't using but building on those successful technologies which is smart

and cost-effective. Point two: Cutting-edge - how's this for you: 'artificial' gravity; solar

power-generation (that should please 'hockey sticks'); ion rocket engine; nuclear fusion

reactor (recently, the first fission power plant opened up since Three-Mile-Island. How sad.

We have had the technology to build much safer fission plants for over 15 years but

liberals wouldn't allow it - they love American energy dependence. It is estimated that

we can have even safer, less costly and -for cattle farters- non-greenhouse gas-producing

fusion plants between 2030-35. NASA and Constellation can accelerate process toward

energy independence by enabling us o have fusion a lot sooner). 

       Neil Armstrong and many other prominent people oppose Obama space plan

and suspect that he giving up America's number one position in space - pure science

and all the benefits - - NASA in your home, car, office, farm, factory, hospital. SAVE
CONSTELLATION - find plan at: rickscisite.blogspot.com and more info at that website

and his website in order to prepare for battle! Don't let NASA fade to black.